Topic: Research Google as a Company and Investigate Google’s Labor/Employee Relations
Introduction
Employee relations in the company seem essential for employee retention and overall business sustainability. Companies usually make different strategies to enhance the creativity, engagement, and good employee relations. Good employee relations create a good impact on production, efficiency, decision making, problem-solving, and overall process improvement. However, with the perspective of human resource management and its integration, good employee relations depict differentiated engagements. This study revolves around employee relations in Google Company along with some insights and impact on the company performance. Google Inc, being a technological giant, is in the limelight due to rapid employee growth and success. The company has an excellent reputation when managing and dealing with employees. However, a comprehensive analysis is imperative to derive both, positive and negative insights to come up with outcomes.
Company Background (Google)
Google Inc is a prominent multinational technology company, dealing with an immense range of internet products and services for the customers in all over the world. The company contains 73,992 employees worldwide and demonstrates a remarkable employee relation and engagement strategy.
Now, coming to the central section of the study, Google Inc has adopted several employee strategies to create and sustain the best relations with employees. The mainstream strategies, used by Google Inc are as under
Employee Relationship Strategies
Social Integration
Google Inc management is conducting operations in various regions of the world. To justify the employee diversity and relations, the company integrates with the local culture. The cultural integration is the best thing that Google Inc has adopted to assess the employee needs and facilitate accordingly. Interestingly, Google Inc, through this cultural integration allows its employees to work as social societies in the company (Grant, 2007). It seems a good initiative to create a culture in which employee can share, react and adopt different thing freely and come up with something new and appreciable in a different market. However, concerning the workplace and management-employee relations, immense motivation and appreciation make the employee’s faces happy (Bender, Contacos-Sawyer, & Thomas, 2013).
Employee Facilitations and Perks
Google Inc facilitates employees through different perks, and behind every perk, there is a valid reason. Instead of considering it as an organizational or HR policy in the company, it is good to see it from the relationship perspective. For Instance, Google Inc assesses the needs of the customers and design some police for creating long-term relations. The example of maternity benefits can be observed in the company, as mothers, working in the company use to get holidays twice than the average rate (Jain & Jain, 2016). Apparently, the purpose is to retain the employees and let them make perception, which turns into good relations and long-term sustainability Overall, the response of employees in the company is quite exceptional in term of job satisfaction, loyalty, engagement, and motivation (Boxall, 2014).
Using data Technology
Google Inc, for better employee relationship, is using data to derive the needs of managers and workers at the workplace. By using technology, Google Inc collects data regarding the needs and intentions and matches the results with the company’s policy. Therefore, several changes with the passage of the time have been observed in this company. It is also the main reason for a unique Google culture, which brings employees closer to the company. Conversely, it has been observed that employees are also assertive in using the technology in the internal process and provide a response to the company (Jung, 2007). For Instance, the communication, through using different information technology tools, is convenient in Google Inc. Based on employee data, the company manages to create a give & take culture, which leads towards the sustainable and robust employee relations (Bradford, 2007).
Another prominent use of the technology in this company is E-mailing and instant messaging to depict the care of the employees and ask for something they need. It is all about avoiding the negligence, as being too busy may make the management invincible for the employees. Thus, use of technology is making the employees engaged (Choudhary, 2014).
Time Consideration for Employees
Comparatively, the research has elaborated that Google Inc is spending a good time with its employee. It seems a quality time, which helps the employee share things they want to share with the management. The big difference that Google Inc has made is volunteering the assistance to the employees in ups and down. Again, the role of culture is crucial in this process, as management serves as an assistant to the employee, even in the hectic situations. It brings the management closer to employees, which strengthen belief and moral values as well (Erdogan, Bauer, & Taylor, 2015).
Fairness
Despite having different benefits, facilities or, perks in the company, the employees are attached to the management. The management is fair to the employee, as discrimination cases in the company are rare. The management of the company provides equal opportunities to the employees to collaborate and share. In Google Inc, the value of the relations has been justified through the management collaborations instead perk and management. Thus, to make the justification visible in the company, the fairness is necessary. Google Inc has gained remarkable success and made the employee its strengths due to this useful consideration (Watanabe, 2013).
Google Conservations
Google Inc is also integrated with the modern trends in creating and sustaining good employee relations. For Instance, recently, Google has initiated Google conservations, which provides opportunities for the employees to ask different questions to executives or management of the companies. Interestingly, some gossip and professional communications can be observed through this process, which is another strategy to bring the employee closer to the management (Lomax, 2014). It has been revealed that this initiative is helping the company in encouraging and empowering the employees to accelerate the interaction with the management. It is an excellent platform for the employees to make this interaction happen. Google’s strategy is in fame, as it reduces the gap between the management and the employee. The employees communicate with the management on both, the work and different social issues, and interestingly, this has not been done at the same level with other organizations at the same level (Tanwar & Prasad, 2016).
Improving Relations through Managers
The internal research is another strategy of this company to identify the needs and improve the relationship at the small level. The management intends to let employees improve relations with manages first. The employee survey is a good initiative in each quarter, which is helpful in obtaining insights and making the decision accordingly (Plester & Hutchison, 2016). For example, if the management finds a manager worse at the workplace, according to employee response, the company trains him to improve the relations. Captivatingly, it is effective for both, the managers and employees justify the employee relation imitative of Google Inc. (Talent-spotters’ ladder to success, 2012).
Intersection of Science & Human Resource
Google Inc is a company, which enables the social integration with the human resource management. The social science intersects with HR strategies in this company, and ultimately, it creates the impact on the employee relations. Be social in operations and facilitation is in the best interest of this company (MacKinnon, 2010). The lunch line, paid time, work environment, and differentiated perks are associated with the social behavior of the employees. The employee, in the result, perceives the company their home, and it validates exceptional employee/labor relations (Strettton, 2011).
Google Rules & Employee Relations
Google Inc is not a strict trainer of employees. A friendly working and training environment for an employee is also one of the top strategies of this company. According to the observations and navigation of the research studies, it can be said that Google Inc has made different rules. All rules, made by Google are for employees. Some attractive rules to boost the employee relations are team empowerment, coaching, career development, and communication (Strettton, 2011).
Differentiated Employee Relations
Google Inc. The company is looking to make the Human resource as people’s operations. It is a process of differentiation for effective employee relations. For Instance, the company not only creates and sustains the relations employees, but it also creates relations with the families. Thus, the employee relation in Google Inc is not limited. For example, if an employee dies during his career in the company, the spouse can receive the half salary for a decade (Shipman, 2006). It is a remarkable operation of human resource department of the company, which creates the relations, which have never been experienced before. Another example can be observed in the production department. Tech workers enjoy luxury perks or facilities, and accordingly, the interactions with the higher management. Due to these differentiated operations, the company makes the employees’ assets and produce results (Steiber & Alänge, 2013).
Critical Analysis
Critically, the employee relations seem reasonable, but the company has made some blunders recently. Continuous changes in employee perks and facilities are making employee confuse. For Instance, mothers in the company got holidays in the months instated of days. However, after practicing this relationship trait, immediate decline (50%) was too significant. Thus, due to these massive change shifts, some frustrations have been observed. Sometimes, the employee relations look controversial at Google Company due to management’s intentions. The management’s intentions toward promotions of employees are not up to the mark. The management promotes employees without developing skills (Pradhan & Jena, 2016). The focus is only on the relationship with the employees (Pagnattaro, 2007). It creates the impact on employee efficiency, productivity, and overall performance. It happens on a large scale in this company. The whole concentration of the management is on employee relations, which results in lack of performance consistency. Too many perks and changes can hit the profitability, as these perks are not sustainable. Interestingly, the employee relations sometimes look unpredictable due to these changes, and this is creating the confusion in the workplace. Comprehensive analysis of the Google employee relation shows inconsistency. Perks usually go viral and controversial in Google, and innovations are costly (Potvin & Levenberg, 2016).
Conclusion
In the end, this is to conclude that Google Inc has successfully sustained good employee relations. The management creates differentiated relations through interactions, motivation, perks, facilitation, and assistance in different situations. Being social is the best employee relations strategy. The study focused on diversified employee relationship strategies along with different insights and impact on the employees. Significant outcomes are efficiency, productivity, sustainability, and retention. However, in future, the company must have come up with some predictable employee relation traits. The change in strategies to maintain the relations is vital. However, the management should focus on sustainability instead of considering continuous spikes.
References
Bender, M., Contacos-Sawyer, J., & Thomas, B. (2013). Benefits Strategies for Attracting and Retaining Employees. Competition Forum; Indiana, 11(2), 165-169.
Boxall, P. (2014). The future of employment relations from the perspective of human resource management. Journal of Industrial Relations, 56(4), 578-593.
Bradford. (2007). Googling out of control: Can Google’s chaos management style ensure continuing the success? Strategic Direction; Bradford, 23(8), 25-27.
Choudhary, A. (2014). Four Critical Traits Of Innovative Organizations. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict; Arden, 18(2), 45-58.
Erdogan, B., Bauer, T. N., & Taylor, S. (2015). Management commitment to the ecological environment and employees: Implications for employee attitudes and citizenship behaviors. Human Relations, 68(11), 1669-1691.
Grant, A. R. (2007). Teamwork In Secular And Faith-Based Organizations. Performance Improvement; Silver Spring, 46(6), 25-29.
Jain, R., & Jain, C. (2016). Employee Creativity: A Conceptual Framework. Management and Labour Studies, 46(4), 294-313.
Jung, J. (2007). Employing innovation. Risk; London, 20(4), 80.
Lomax, A. L. (2014). Five-Star Exclusion: Modern Silicon Valley Companies Are Pushing the Limits of Section 119 by Providing Tax-Free Meals to Employees. Washington and Lee Law Review; Lexington, 71(3), 2077-2114.
MacKinnon, R. (2010). Google Rules. Index on Censorship, 39(1), 32-45.
Pagnattaro, M. A. (2007). “The Google Challenge”: Enforcement of Noncompete and Trade Secret Agreements for Employees Working in China. American Business Law Journal; Oxford, Ohio, 44(4), 603-637.
Plester, B., & Hutchison, A. (2016). Fun times: the relationship between fun and workplace engagement. Employee Relations, 38(3), 332-350.
Potvin, R., & Levenberg, J. (2016). Why Google Stores Billions of Lines of Code in a Single Repository. Association for Computing Machinery. Communications of the ACM; New York, 59(7), 78.
Pradhan, R. K., & Jena, L. K. (2016). Employee Performance at Workplace: Conceptual Model and Empirical Validation. Business Perspectives and Research, 5(1), 69-85.
Shipman, D. (2006). Can we learn a few things from Google? Nursing Management; Chicago, 37(8), 10-12.
Steiber, A., & Alänge, S. (2013). A corporate system for continuous innovation: the case of Google Inc. European Journal of Innovation Management; Bradford, 16(2), 243-264.
Strettton, L. (2011). How Google Apps could help managers operate more cost-effectively. Manager; Telford, 6.
Talent-spotters’ ladder to success. (2012). Human Resource Management International Digest; Bradford, 20(3), 15-17.
Tanwar, K., & Prasad, A. (2016). Exploring the Relationship between Employer Branding and Employee Retention. Global Business Review, 7(3), 186S-206S.
Watanabe, K. (2013). The western perspective in Yahoo! News and Google News. International Communication Gazette, 75(2), 141-156.
+447462439809